The 2013 product information for the Chevrolet Silverado HD and Sierra HD pickup trucks was released Tuesday, and as you might expect, there isn't much change from 2012.

The 2013 order book includes a new CNG bifuel option package on Silverado 2500 HD and Sierra 2500 HD extended cabs. The trucks can be ordered at any dealership in four- or two-wheel-drive configurations, with an 8-foot long bed or 6-foot-7-inch short bed.

The 2013 HD models will be offered with two new colors: Deep Ruby Metallic and Blue Topaz Metallic for the Silverado 2500 and 3500 HD. The GMC models will get a new Sonoma Red Metallic and Heritage Blue Metallic.

The one final improvement that will be included on all GM HD trucks (Chevy and GMC) is that the six-speed transmission available with the 6.0-liter V-8 gas option will include the same grade-braking capability in normal driving mode that it had previously only when tow/haul mode was selected.

I don't think these buyers will care where their trucks will be in 20 yrs. After the warrenty runs out, they want a new one anyway. I never heard of PUTC deleting posts due to opinion.

I can't get over how much sleeker the Sierra HD hood looks than the Silverado's big bulge hood. Chevy can't make the grill taller without distorting the trademark I suppose.

Posted by: Stevadore | Jun 27, 2012 11:12:23 AM

I like the look of the body colored front and single piece bumper on the chevy.
I'm wondering if the 2014 model GM trucks will continue to share cab, bed, sheetmetal and overall size inorder to achieve EPA fuel economy standards?

Posted by: Jugger | Jun 27, 2012 11:16:52 AM

6L80 is NOT in the HD's. It even shows in the files you linked that they are 6L90s. You need to fix the link on the news page, because it says 6L80 and not 6L90.

Posted by: Kemo | Jun 27, 2012 11:25:15 AM

The small interior is still there, which why I got a Ford F450, it also has bigger brakes and the turning radius is awesome better than any pickup on the market...The interior is huge

Posted by: los | Jun 27, 2012 11:30:03 AM

how can anyone look at the Government Motors Corporation Stamp on the front and feel good about driving that truck

Posted by: Built with out taxpayers $$$$ | Jun 27, 2012 11:34:40 AM

Small changes indeed. Sux to be a GM Fanboi!

Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2012 11:39:25 AM

@builtwithouttaxpayer$$$

The same way as a person driving a Chevy, it is the same truck. I feel better about driving a GMC as it looks better. Not sure why an emblem makes such a huge difference when it is under one parent company. If you would drive a Chevy you are a hypocrite, no other way to put it.

PS, each of the big three got money from the Goverment. Ford borrowed 23.5 billion from the government, sounds like tax payer $$ to me. Which company are you talking about didn't use tax payer money btw?

Tyler,
There seems to be a bit of confusion about the money automakers have received. There is a difference between a loan (that was paid back in full) and a bailout. Hope that helps clear things up.

Posted by: Scout | Jun 27, 2012 12:10:13 PM

@Frank
Why does it suck to be a GM fanboy? They have best HD on the market, and tests to prove it and back it up. They got a good mpg 1500 that will do what a normal family's need for a truck. Sounds to me like its awsome to a GM fanboy, and with the new trucks will only get better.

Worth noting that the current Silverado HD recently won the Car and Driver shootout and outpointed Ford and Ram in recent Consumer Reports rankings.

Posted by: Tom Wilkinson at Chevy | Jun 27, 2012 12:27:24 PM

@johnny dose,

Sucks to be a GM Fanboi becuase Ford is outselling GM in HD department with the same old Ford Superduty since '99, now am I right?

Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2012 12:36:07 PM

PS, each of the big three got money from the Goverment. Ford borrowed 23.5 billion from the government, sounds like tax payer $$ to me. Which company are you talking about didn't use tax payer money btw?
Posted by: Tyler | Jun 27, 2012 11:52:05 AM

yea the key word their is BORROWED not given, like they did for GM they GAVE them money

Posted by: Built with out taxpayers $$$$ | Jun 27, 2012 12:43:22 PM

@Built with out taxpayers $$$$ They BORROWED so much so no one else could, and then still had the guts to go stand in line for the hand out till they found out it wouldn't do them any good!!! Crooks!!!!

@Frank First or last we all know who beat who in the tuff HD testing, and the 1500s that had the best mpg for the longest time. Like I said it will only get better when GM is on even ground with all new motors like Ford is.

Posted by: johnny doe | Jun 27, 2012 1:04:01 PM

I'm too stupid to understand the difference between a loan and a BAILOUT!

r they ever gonna change them tow mirrors.. looks like an after thought..

i still cant bring myself to like a gm fullsize bcuz of the steering wheel being off set to the driver... yuck

Posted by: uh huh | Jun 27, 2012 1:38:34 PM

Much nicer looking truck than the Silverado HD. Stevador is right, the hood makes all the difference. The GMC's don't have wavy rear quarters like the Chevy's do either.

Posted by: Big Bob | Jun 27, 2012 1:40:23 PM

@Scout, I really think you owe an apology to everyone for not thinking or researching before speaking.

Bailout definition: A capital infusion offered to a business with a national or multi-national footprint that is in danger of bankruptcy, insolvency, or total liquidation (IE Ford was in danger at this point). Â Financial aid can be provided in the form of debt or equity offerings, cash contributions, or some form of LOAN...

A bailout is a colloquial pejorative term for giving a LOAN to a company or country which faces serious financial difficulty (Ford's loan) or bankruptcy.

Bailouts can take the form of LOANS!

Didn't Ford get a loan? Isn't that constituted as a bailout by the above term when a company gets a loan when they are in financial danger? Let me see, let me think, hmmm...

Quote from another article "Ford never stopped using its logo or factories, but posted them as collateral in 2006 in order to get a USD 23.5 billion loan and avoid bankruptcy. Executive Chairman Bill Ford, the great grandson of company founder Henry Ford, said Tuesday that giving up the rights to the oval was "enormously emotional for me personally and for my family."

I should be clear, not all of it was government loans. I do apologize, about a 1/4 was government backed and the rest they were able to get privately. If I remember correctly they government wouldn't give them anymore so they had to go private.

Which company took the huge bailout so they wouldn't go bankrupt? Hmm, wasn't that the same company that then went bankrupt anyway and stuck the parts industry with dept never to be paid putting thousands out of work and cost the investors (you and me) a fortune? And the same company "became" a new company so it is no longer responsible for previous warranties or law suits? That's something to be proud of isn't it?

Posted by: ford850 | Jun 27, 2012 2:19:39 PM

@Tyler
There are a few important details that need to be addressed. First, the $23.5bn in loans were secured in 2006-07, all of which came from a syndicate of banks, including JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Citibank. The $5.9bn government loan was not secured until 2009.

Second, while Ford did take the DOE loan (along with Nissan, Tesla, and Fisker), GM and Chrysler also applied ($14.4bn for GM, $7bn for Chrysler, later reduced to $3.5bn). Both were denied at the time because neither met the criteria for being viable companies. GM withdrew its application in 2011 because it wanted to mitigate the "government motors" criticism, and Chrysler withdrew in February because it found the loan terms too stringent.

Third, while I won't argue with your literal definition of bailout, there is a substantial difference between a capital infusion that must be paid back and an infusion that is not. Ford is required to pay back the $4.4bn it borrowed under the DOE loan. GM did pay back the portion of its government-funded capital infusion that was a loan, but the government is still on the hook for its ownership stake in the company. If that stake were to be sold today, the government would lose roughly $16bn.

Fourth, on top of the capital injected into GM, the goverment bent the tax rules for New GM just a bit. Even though a new legal entity was created post-bankruptcy, GM was allowed to carry over $45bn in pre-bankruptcy losses to offset post-bankruptcy profits, resulting in zero tax paid on $7.6bn in 2011 profit.

Sorry about going off-topic.

Posted by: Luke in CO | Jun 27, 2012 2:21:17 PM

Now back to the article... although I like the look of Ford trucks the best, of the GMC and Chevy 1/2 ton and HD trucks I put the GMC right behind the Fords. After the GMC I would say the Rams are next, and then the 2 Chevy trucks last. They really messed up the look of the Chevy trucks lately.

Posted by: ford850 | Jun 27, 2012 2:28:42 PM

so if a Bailout and loan is the same thing why did GM take the bailout or loan (as you like to call it) and then file for bankruptcy after they got it, why did GM not have to put any collateral like Ford did what am i missing here, you go to make any loan you need collateral not?, if it was a loan given to GM why do they call it a bailout,

Posted by: Built with out taxpayers $$$$ | Jun 27, 2012 2:39:47 PM

with that said i am over it, sorry for offending anyone, i will change my name, back to the topic

Posted by: Built with out taxpayers $$$$ | Jun 27, 2012 2:41:47 PM

Mark Willams, When will we get to see the latest GM Truck spy shots posted Monday by Jeremy Kupfer elsewhere? Looks like they were taken in Florida. I know they look like the same old camo but at least they put some bumpers on these!

Posted by: Stevadore | Jun 27, 2012 3:16:30 PM

@built without tax money. At least you manned up . I can respect that.

Posted by: HEMI V8 | Jun 27, 2012 3:24:06 PM

@Stevadore, did you see the spy photos in the "GM Manufacturing..." article on Monday?

Posted by: ford850 | Jun 27, 2012 3:24:54 PM

ford850, Those look like they are from the same group but the ones I saw were road shots with different models and Palm trees about.

Posted by: Stevadore | Jun 27, 2012 3:52:48 PM

"@Scout, I really think you owe an apology to everyone for not thinking or researching before speaking."

I think the post's following that explain where I was coming from. But just in case, Ford did not take a bailout/handout to prevent bankruptcy.

As for posting definitions and their meanings. Let's define

LONE.
A loan is a sum of money that is given by one party to another for a limited amount of time. It is to be repaid according to terms of the loan agreement which includes any interest to be charged and a time frame for repayment.

1
a : money lent at interest b : something lent usually for the borrower's temporary use
2
a : the grant of temporary use b : the temporary duty of a person transferred to another job for a limited time

An arrangement in which a lender gives money or property to a borrower, and the borrower agrees to return the property or repay the money, usually along with interest, at some future point(s) in time. Usually, there is a predetermined time for repaying a loan, and generally the lender has to bear the risk that the borrower may not repay a loan (though modern capital markets have developed many ways of managing this risk).

That sure don't seem like what happened in GM's situation.

Posted by: Scout | Jun 27, 2012 4:57:48 PM

This BS about the bailout is getting old. Who cares who got whatever money from the government. If the arguments aren't about the bailout, it's usually about the low-hanging frames and the lack of a SFA on the HDs and/or about the crappy interiors.

Posted by: Steven | Jun 27, 2012 5:20:51 PM

@Built with out taxpayers $$$$

You seem to be pretty ticked off about GM taking a bailout. How dare they do that. I bet if you had a company and the govt. was willing to give you money you would take it to.

IT REALLY CHAPS MY A$$ WHEN PEOPLE BLAME GM FOR TAKING A BAILOUT. WHY DON'T YOU BLAME OBUMMER AND THE REST OF THE GOVT. FOR PUSHING THIS VENTURE.

Oh yea, you probably voted for that nincaput, and don't want to admit or say that what he and the govt did is wrong. I will say that GM should should not have gotten this bailout and been faced to deal with its debt like every other American.

Posted by: Mr. Joe | Jun 27, 2012 6:33:17 PM

"IT REALLY CHAPS MY A$$ WHEN PEOPLE BLAME GM FOR TAKING A BAILOUT. WHY DON'T YOU BLAME OBUMMER AND THE REST OF THE GOVT. FOR PUSHING THIS VENTURE."

It was that MORON G.W. Bush that gave the handout. Not Obama.

Check your facts!

Posted by: Frank | Jun 27, 2012 6:43:04 PM

I agree about the bailouts. I think we should only bailout the big banks and the big brokerage companies. We should have let GM and Chrysler crash or better yet let GM become a totally Chinese company. We should only have Japanese and Korean vehicles in our market and let the Chinese into our market. We Americans make lousy vehicles and we should let our car and truck market go the way of our computer and small appliance market. Why don't we increase unemployment in America and help give the Chinese more jobs. Maybe Chase and Citibank could invest their money in Chinese companies and get a tax break for it. God bless free enterprise and Wall Street. Let's close more American businesses and just tell the unemployed to eat cake. After all Wall Street will take care of all of us.

Posted by: God Bless Free Enterprise | Jun 27, 2012 6:54:23 PM

I agree about the bailouts. I think we should only bailout the big banks and the big brokerage companies. We should have let GM and Chrysler crash or better yet let GM become a totally Chinese company. We should only have Japanese and Korean vehicles in our market and let the Chinese into our market. We Americans make lousy vehicles and we should let our car and truck market go the way of our computer and small appliance market. Why don't we increase unemployment in America and help give the Chinese more jobs. Maybe Chase and Citibank could invest their money in Chinese companies and get a tax break for it. God bless free enterprise and Wall Street. Let's close more American businesses and just tell the unemployed to eat cake. After all Wall Street will take care of all of us.

Posted by: God Bless Free Enterprise | Jun 27, 2012 6:54:23 PM

tell me again which country GM sold the most vehicles in and is building factories so they can employ cheaper labor oh yea let me see CHINA, Mr. Joe guess what i have my own company and the government was no where to found when i could have used some extra help in '08 &'09 but hey they still taxed the hell out of my company, government does not give companies like mine and handouts or bailouts you know we are to small, they just tax the HELL out of me so they can bailout the big companies like GM so they can send their work over seas and get big tax breaks

PS i did not vote for Obama

Posted by: Built without Taxpayers $$$ | Jun 27, 2012 7:11:30 PM

@Built without taxpayer $$$$, FORD is better for going to CHINA
& RUSSIA putting CHINA made transmissions in their mustang.

Just take A few mins. and bend down and look under your F250, F350, F450 & F550.....Made in.....INDIA !!! GO FORD!!!!!!!! BUILT INDIA TOUGH !!!!!!

Posted by: Mr. TRUCK | Jun 27, 2012 9:03:32 PM

how can anyone look at the Government Motors Corporation Stamp on the front and feel good about driving that truck

-I agree. I'd never step foot in a GMC. They should burn that Govt. brand as far as I'm concerned. A total embarassment it is. How can one drive a GMC with any pride is beyond my comprehension. Chevrolet I back... Chevrolet would have lived on without Govt. money if that bonehead GM Corp. wasn't at the helm anyway. Heck, Chevrolet carried all of those other brands for years. However, they need to fix the looks before I'd buy one of those either. Chevy trucks have been a mess inside and out as of late. As it is, if I needed a HD truck it would be a Ford or Dodge. Maybe someday a Chevrolet.

Posted by: WaltRogers | Jun 27, 2012 10:09:16 PM

Sucks to be a GM Fanboi becuase Ford is outselling GM in HD department with the same old Ford Superduty since '99, now am I right?

@Frank, Yep. We have the looks (nice wavy sheetmetal Chevy), we have the interiors (nice junk interiors Chevy), we have the high tucked away frame (nice low slung frame Chevy, drag much?), and we have the SFA (oh, nice torsion bars Chevy. LOL!!). GMC is a ghetto bling government ObamaMobile.

Posted by: BlueOvalEmpire | Jun 27, 2012 10:20:22 PM

@FRANK

Yes you are part right. Bush did put forth the first bailout money and Obummer followed it up with much more. This is his claim to glory for saving the auto industry.

If I and my business have to learn to live with in my means and suffer any all consequences why shouldn't gm or any of the big banks we bailed out. The banks were screwin us before this and are still doin it today - no lesson was learned.
WALLSTREET SUXS!!!!!!

Posted by: Mr. Joe | Jun 27, 2012 10:28:12 PM

The 2nd gen Toyota Tundra designed by the American engineers at Toyota USA for the USA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plloQ_1qC4I, built with the most domestic parts, assembled in the conservative state of Texas and built without the US govt. tax payer money. (“As a republican bonus they wouldn’t let the lazy UAW touch it so you wouldn’t have to support the greedy union workers that are destroying America.”) LOL
If the percentage of domestic part is what matters the most to you than you want the full size 2nd gen Tundra from Toyota.
If where it was assembled matters the most to you than you want the full size 2nd gen Tundra from Toyota.
If no US govt. tax payer money is what matters to you than you want the full size 2nd gen Tundra from Toyota.
If you don’t want to support Unions and that is what matters the most to you than you want the full size 2nd gen Tundra from Toyota .
If you want a truck that is as hard working and dependable as the conservatives who built it than you want the 2nd gen Tundra from Toyota. (With all that no wonder JD Power said it was the most dependable for 7yrs in a row)LOL
If you want the truck that is the best combination of all those things than want the full size 2nd gen Tundra from Toyota.
If none of those Republican talking points matter the most to you or you bought something else because it’s what you like than can we please quit quibbling. Progressive out!

Posted by: 5.3L LOL | Jun 27, 2012 11:21:15 PM

It was Bush who agreed to the bailout, but at the behest of President Elect Obama. Bush did not want to include the automakers, but after the election, he agreed to President Elect Obama's request. This was an Obama bailout. He was the one who begged for it.